Evening Star Posted March 3, 2012 Report Share Posted March 3, 2012 If you were to give voters in Calgary the policybooks for each party and not tell them from which party the books come from, you'd likely find most would prefer the Liberal policy book. This seems like a bold claim to me. What makes you sure of this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted March 3, 2012 Report Share Posted March 3, 2012 Muclair is this party's only hope of attempting to form a government. If any of the radical lefties win (Nash, Topp and to a lesser extent Dewar), its back to 3rd place and irrelevancy. If you think Paul Dewar is anything close to a radical leftist, you really need to meet a radical leftist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UofGPolitico Posted March 3, 2012 Report Share Posted March 3, 2012 If you think Paul Dewar is anything close to a radical leftist, you really need to meet a radical leftist. I said to a lesser extent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 3, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 3, 2012 If you think Paul Dewar is anything close to a radical leftist, you really need to meet a radical leftist. Like Peggy Nash! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted March 3, 2012 Report Share Posted March 3, 2012 I only disagree with your last sentence. It is just a feeling I have from watching the debates. They seem friendlier than the others. And I'm adding in my thoughts on them being center types. Just a guess really. If you think Paul Dewar is anything close to a radical leftist, you really need to meet a radical leftist. And if you think Topp and Nash are radicals you haven't met a REAL radical leftist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 Muclair is this party's only hope of attempting to form a government. If any of the radical lefties win (Nash, Topp and to a lesser extent Dewar), its back to 3rd place and irrelevancy. Radical?Is putting the interests of average Canadians ahead of corporations radical?If putting the interests of regular Canadians first is radical then putting the interests of corporations first is plain stupidity! Peggy Nash as far as I'm concerned is the only choice.Aswell it does not matter who wins the NDP will remain true to our values and bring good government to Canada!Something not seen in a long time! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UofGPolitico Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 Radical?Is putting the interests of average Canadians ahead of corporations radical?If putting the interests of regular Canadians first is radical then putting the interests of corporations first is plain stupidity! Peggy Nash as far as I'm concerned is the only choice.Aswell it does not matter who wins the NDP will remain true to our values and bring good government to Canada!Something not seen in a long time! WWWTT If the NDP wants government, some of its values will need to be set aside, which is why I say Muclair is probably the best choice if government is truly the intention. Canadian voters will never elect a pro-labour and anti-corporation government, they just won't. There is a growing income-equality divide, yes, but still the majority of Canadians still make enough money to live comfortably (that is if they spend wisely). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 If the NDP wants government, some of its values will need to be set aside, which is why I say Muclair is probably the best choice if government is truly the intention. Canadian voters will never elect a pro-labour and anti-corporation government, they just won't. There is a growing income-equality divide, yes, but still the majority of Canadians still make enough money to live comfortably (that is if they spend wisely). Then why did the NDP get 103 seats in the last election?Because everyone thought Mulcair may become leader and that Jack would die? People voted NDP for NDP values!Maybe you don't like that but thats tuff and thats reality! Do you sincerely believe that an NDP leader will brush aside or impose any of their own values on the party?Good luck with that one buddy!They would have to go throught the same process as anyone else in the party. As far as the gap between the rich and the poor goes we don't even have to look that far.People in Canada right now are seeing that just having a good job doesn't get them as far as what it did in the past.Do you sincerely believe that Canadians are just going to accept that? Vote NDP! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 If the NDP wants government, some of its values will need to be set aside, which is why I say Muclair is probably the best choice if government is truly the intention. Canadian voters will never elect a pro-labour and anti-corporation government, they just won't. There is a growing income-equality divide, yes, but still the majority of Canadians still make enough money to live comfortably (that is if they spend wisely). Mulcair is as concerned about the income divide as others. That key element will not be put out to pasture ever. He's just not one of the social democrats that would use a sledgehammer to drive in an upholstery tack. I believe with him at the helm and Singh as finance critic, the party can do great things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 Then why did the NDP get 103 seats in the last election?Because everyone thought Mulcair may become leader and that Jack would die? People voted NDP for NDP values!Maybe you don't like that but thats tuff and thats reality! Do you sincerely believe that an NDP leader will brush aside or impose any of their own values on the party?Good luck with that one buddy!They would have to go throught the same process as anyone else in the party. As far as the gap between the rich and the poor goes we don't even have to look that far.People in Canada right now are seeing that just having a good job doesn't get them as far as what it did in the past.Do you sincerely believe that Canadians are just going to accept that? Vote NDP! WWWTT 103 seats isn't government though. As well Mulcair has been pretty clear about changing the party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 NDP debate this afternoon at 2pm eastern standard time on cpac.Check your local listings! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 103 seats isn't government though. As well Mulcair has been pretty clear about changing the party. If the liberals did not screw up and the conservatives only achieved a minority then yes 103 seats would have bein enough to form the government through a coalition. Hey if Mulcair wins I will support him,but till then he is only just one of many contenders! And it doesn't matter because any NDP MP is 10 times better than any conservative or liberal MP! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 If the liberals did not screw up and the conservatives only achieved a minority then yes 103 seats would have bein enough to form the government through a coalition. Hey if Mulcair wins I will support him,but till then he is only just one of many contenders! And it doesn't matter because any NDP MP is 10 times better than any conservative or liberal MP! WWWTT If the Liberals would be willing to have a coalition. Mulcair has said he wants to change the party though, which is something you said does't need to be done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evening Star Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 If the Liberals would be willing to have a coalition. Yeah, I never had much faith that the Liberals would have been willing to support the NDP as the junior partner in a coalition (not least of all because they themselves swore that they had no interest in forming a coalition.) I think it would have just come down to which party could make the more attractive offer. Mulcair has said he wants to change the party though, which is something you said does't need to be done. He's mostly spoken about changing the way the party communicates and markets itself, as opposed to changing its principles or policies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 Yeah, I never had much faith that the Liberals would have been willing to support the NDP as the junior partner in a coalition (not least of all because they themselves swore that they had no interest in forming a coalition.) I think it would have just come down to which party could make the more attractive offer. I'm sorry but you have to be dead wrong. I bet right now there are many liberals wishing they could go back in time to take that coalition offer now.Or if another coalition offer came up the liberals would be salivating at the opportunity to have some kind of hand in the government! Just because Ignatieff was an idiot does not mean that the current liberals would let opportunity knocking at the door go unanswered a second time.Not that they're much better. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 Debate from Montreal begins at 2pm EST today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 What's the big deal of thinking about joining another party and just look at how many politicans belong to other parties during their career. Rae was provincial NDP but federal Liberal, the PM was liberal as a young person then a PC, then a reformer/alliance and now a Conservative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 I'm sorry but you have to be dead wrong. I bet right now there are many liberals wishing they could go back in time to take that coalition offer now.Or if another coalition offer came up the liberals would be salivating at the opportunity to have some kind of hand in the government! Just because Ignatieff was an idiot does not mean that the current liberals would let opportunity knocking at the door go unanswered a second time.Not that they're much better. WWWTT There are many Liberals who would be just as willing to see a Conservative government as opposed to an NDP government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2012/03/01/john-ivison-mulcair-asked-for-conservative-cabinet-post-before-joining-ndp-tory-insider/ Mr. Mulcair calls the claims “transparently false,” while acknowledging he talked to the Conservatives (and the Liberals and the Greens) before opting to join the NDP, after quitting Jean Charest’s provincial Liberal government in Quebec City. I've no doubt in my mind (like any politician would) would take the best deal given to them..if that was the CPC he would be a conservative..if it was the liberals who gave him the best offer it would have been the liberals, but hes an NDP and now 6 years later he is running to be the leader of the party Give me a break everyone does this. Harper use to be a Liberal, Rae NDP, Heck Layton comes from a PC family with his father being a cabinet minster in the Mulroney government. You just don't like where he stands on Israel which is fine but give me a break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 What's the big deal of thinking about joining another party and just look at how many politicans belong to other parties during their career. Rae was provincial NDP but federal Liberal, the PM was liberal as a young person then a PC, then a reformer/alliance and now a Conservative. You would think that by the time a politician reaches their fifties they would know if they were left wing or right wing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 There are many Liberals who would be just as willing to see a Conservative government as opposed to an NDP government. I agree! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 You would think that by the time a politician reaches their fifties they would know if they were left wing or right wing. You do know Rae was 50 when he was last a NDP member don't you. Can you say double standard? Cause I can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfoundlander Posted March 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 You do know Rae was 50 when he was last a NDP member don't you. Can you say double standard? Cause I can. Did I say anything about Rae? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UofGPolitico Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 (edited) Then why did the NDP get 103 seats in the last election?Because everyone thought Mulcair may become leader and that Jack would die? No, because voters in Quebec voted in a bloc like they always did and fell in love with Jack Layton. Current polls suggest the NDP would only win a handful of seats. People didn't all of the sudden become enamored with NDP policies. Yes, the NDP does have values that seem in line with many Quebecors, but one election does not establish that is why they voted en mass for them. The rest of the country only elected 6 more New Democrats outside of Quebec. People voted NDP for NDP values!Maybe you don't like that but thats tuff and thats reality! See my first point, and even if that is the case, they still need to secure at least a million more of those voters to win goverment. Do you sincerely believe that an NDP leader will brush aside or impose any of their own values on the party?Good luck with that one buddy!They would have to go throught the same process as anyone else in the party. It happens all the time. The party membership elects a leader, who by viture gets en endorsement of his or her value set even if there are slight shifts from the historical value set that party holds. Of course Muclair can't change the party wholesale, but he can certainly make changes to strike a better balance between the labour old guard forces in that party and attracting the political centre any party in this country needs in order to govern. As far as the gap between the rich and the poor goes we don't even have to look that far.People in Canada right now are seeing that just having a good job doesn't get them as far as what it did in the past.Do you sincerely believe that Canadians are just going to accept that? Well, so far there hasn't been enough mobilization of these forces to elect an NDP government. I don't doubt there are people out there that are having a tough time, I don't doubt that at all. If the problem were as dire though as some would suggest, the NDP would be in government now wouldn't they? Maybe the fault then lies in the party for not effectively mobilizing that electorate then? Edited March 4, 2012 by UofGPolitico Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
j44 Posted March 4, 2012 Report Share Posted March 4, 2012 I believe with him at the helm and Singh as finance critic, the party can do great things. I think you are getting out front a little. Singh has been a surprise in the debates but he hasn't been amazing. And he has to win a seat first. As well Mulcair has been pretty clear about changing the party. Agreed. Hey if Mulcair wins I will support him,but till then he is only just one of many contenders! And it doesn't matter because any NDP MP is 10 times better than any conservative or liberal MP! He's not just one contender he is the front runner. And IMO he is the only one that will immediately attract outside voters to the party and help them in Quebec just by his presence. Is the 10 times better a fact? He's mostly spoken about changing the way the party communicates and markets itself, as opposed to changing its principles or policies. He's spoken pretty plainly about his policy views and they don't seem to be in the mainstream of the party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.